ABNC 13/11/14 correction to facts in WSGazette 12/11 article

Your article ‘£15 billion pound roads investment welcomed’ (12 November) contains one bit of very good news, Nick Herbert’s statement that does not support Option B, the new Arundel Bypass route suggested by Department for Transport consultants in August, which goes through Binsted and Walberton. However, there are some inaccuracies in the other words of Nick Herbert as quoted in your article.

One is that the ‘Pink/Blue’ route (Option A, the only other offline bypass route proposed by the consultants) would ‘avoid the National Park’. It would not. It would be within the National Park along nearly half of its route, from the present A27 down to where it comes out of the woods at Tortington.

The other inaccuracy is his description of Option B as going ‘between Binsted and Walberton’. This gives the impression of a gap between the two villages through which Option B can pass without damage – which is not the case.

Since Option B goes through the part of Binsted where houses are closest together, crossing Binsted lane twice, with houses in its path, and marooning 8 houses to the south of it, ‘through Binsted’ is the only true description.

Option B has two routes at the northern end and since they both destroy houses, even though these are on the edge of Walberton, ‘through Walberton’ is a more correct description.

Five folders of photographs showing the damage Option B would do can be viewed on our website, www.arundelneighbourhood.com .

If the Chancellor recommends further work on the Arundel traffic problems in his Autumn Statement, let’s hope for a proper public consultation with less ‘spin’ and factual misrepresentation, and a chance for public consultation on all the consultants’ options.

Emma Tristram

Secretary, Arundel Bypass Neighbourhood Committee

Subscribe to our mailing list

We need your support to see off threats to Binsted and Arundel's countryside & seek better solutions.